Developer files suit against borough

POTTSTOWN - For the past seven years, the borough has been collecting between $750,000 and $1 million per year in permit fees it was not authorized to issue, according to a lawyer who filed a lawsuit against the borough on June 8.

The suit was filed by High Street attorney Adam Sager on behalf of local developer and property owner Frank McLaughlin.

According to the suit, the borough failed to pass an ordinance re-authorizing itself to issue permits and the fees that accompany them for things like roof and siding replacements after the Pennsylvania General Assembly adopted changes to the Uniform Construction Code.

Advertisement

"Since July 16, 2004, the defendant

has been requiring permits and fees for a substantial amount of work that has never been required to have a permit and, in fact, which is excluded under Act 92," Sager wrote in the suit.

Contacted Wednesday, Sager explained that when the new codes were adopted in 2004, the borough, which had been issuing permits for this type of work under its prior ordinances, needed to file paperwork with the state and receive permission to adopt a new ordinance authorizing the issuing of the permits.

It did not do this and has since then been collecting permit fees and inspection fees to which it was not entitled, Sager said.

The new law adopted in 2004 also required the borough to have the official performing commercial plan reviews and inspections for alarms and sprinklers to be certified to do "electric plan reviews," according to the suit.

However, until recently, those reviews were being conducted by Fire Marshal Richard Lengel "even though the current fire marshal has never successfully passed the ICC test in order to perform these inspections," the suit charges.

Sager said he confirmed that information by checking with the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry.

Added to the damages is the fact that McLaughlin, and others, have been prosecuted by the borough for doing work without certain permits, even though the borough is not authorized to issue or require those permits, the suit charges.

"Not to mention the loss of work to all those people and local handymen who may have lost out on $500 or $1,000 renovation jobs because they required a $250 permit that the borough was not in a position to legally require," Sager said.

Sager said he and his client attempted to meet with the borough and the borough's insurance agent to work out an amicable solution, but the meeting was canceled.

His attempts to reschedule were ignored and it was not until after he had filed the lawsuit that he heard back from the insurance carrier, Sager said.

He also said that former Code Enforcement Director Jeff Smith will testify that he made borough Solicitor Charles D. Garner Jr. and Inspections Department Manager Maria Bleile aware of the requirements after the new code was passed in Harrisburg "and he was assured the borough was already in compliance," Sager said.

Garner could not be reached for comment..

Sager said he intends to seek other potential litigants and to expand the action into a class action lawsuit.

About the Author

Evan Brandt has worked for The Mercury since November 1997. His beat includes Pottstown, the surrounding townships and the Pottstown and Pottsgrove school districts, as well as other varied general topics like politics, the environment and education. Reach the author at ebrandt@pottsmerc.com
or follow Evan on Twitter: @PottstownNews.